Posted on 05/30/2008 10:21:34 AM PDT by Ultra Sonic 007
Some of you will remember my recent decision to become a Catholic. I suppose I should be surprised it ended getting derailed into a 'Catholic vs. Protestant' thread, but after going further into the Religion forum, I suppose it's par for the course.
There seems to be a bit of big issue concerning Mary. I wanted to share an observation of sorts.
Now...although I was formerly going by 'Sola Scriptura', my father was born and raised Catholic, so I do have some knowledge of Catholic doctrine (not enough, at any rate...so consider all observations thusly).
Mary as a 'co-redeemer', Mary as someone to intercede for us with regards to our Lord Jesus.
Now...I can definitely see how this would raise some hairs. After all, Jesus Himself said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and that none come to the Father but through Him. I completely agree.
I do notice a bit of a fundamental difference in perception though. Call it a conflict of POV. Do Catholics worship Mary (as I've seen a number of Protestants proclaim), or do they rather respect and venerate her (as I've seen Catholics claim)? Note that it's one thing to regard someone with reverence; I revere President Bush as the noted leader of the free world. I revere my father. I revere Dr. O'Neil, a humorous and brilliant math teacher at my university. It's an act of respect.
But do I WORSHIP them?
No. Big difference between respecting/revering and worshiping. At least, that's how I view it.
I suppose it's also a foible to ask Mary to pray for us, on our behalf...but don't we tend to also ask other people to pray for us? Doesn't President Bush ask for people to pray for him? Don't we ask our family members to pray for us for protection while on a trip? I don't see quite a big disconnect between that and asking Mary to help pray for our wellbeing.
There is some question to the fact that she is physically dead. Though it stands to consider that she is still alive, in Heaven. Is it not common practice to not just regard our physical life, but to regard most of all our spirit, our soul? That which survives the flesh before ascending to Heaven or descending to Hell after God's judgment?
I don't think it's that big of a deal. I could change my mind after reading more in-depth, but I don't think that the Catholic Church has decreed via papal infallibility that Mary is to be placed on a higher pedestal than Jesus, or even to be His equal.
Do I think she is someone to be revered and respected? Certainly. She is the mother of Jesus, who knew Him for His entire life as a human on Earth. Given that He respected her (for He came to fulfill the old laws; including 'Honor Thy Father and Mother'), I don't think it's unnatural for other humans to do the same. I think it's somewhat presumptuous to regard it on the same level as idolatry or supplanting Jesus with another.
In a way, I guess the way Catholics treat Mary and the saints is similar to how the masses treated the Apostles following the Resurrection and Jesus's Ascension: people who are considered holy in that they have a deep connection with Jesus and His Word, His Teachings, His Message. As the Apostles spread the Good News and are remembered and revered to this day for their work, so to are the works of those sainted remembered and revered. Likewise with Mary. Are the Apostles worshiped? No. That's how it holds with Mary and the saints.
At least, that's how my initial thoughts on the subject are. I'll have to do more reading.
Please don't quote Apologetic sites, whether acknowledged or not. Try some unbiased sources please.
Thanks for the kind remarks...actually we had him buried that far away from us, for a couple of reasons...at the time we were military, so we did not know where we might be in the future...and secondly if we remained in this area, I was afraid that it would become an obsession, that I would want to spend every day at the cemetery...that would not do, as I still had a hubby and another son to care for...
So since I had family, mom and dad, and other family members, who lived near to where that cemetery was, and since my sons favorite uncle was buried in that cemetery we thought it would be the best place to bury him...not so close, that we would be there all of the time, but within two days drive....not too close, but not too far....that seemed to be the ideal...so that is what we did...
The cemetery, is on a cliff, on the Northern California coast, overlooking the Pacific Ocean....so when we go, we visit with the son, have our lunch, and enjoy some incredible scenery as well...it really is the perfect spot...
As the object of the society was the propagation and strengthening of the Catholic faith everywhere, the Jesuits naturally endeavored to counteract the spread of Protestantism . They became the main instruments of the Counter-Reformation ; the re-conquest of southern and western Germany and Austria for the Church , and the preservation of the Catholic faith in France and other countries were due chiefly to their exertions. (Catholic Encyclopedia)
You left out the
‘real’ fantasized make believe imagined lap.
Or is ti lap and white hanky?
The gaps would only matter if the previous pope had to pick the new one and that doesn’t happen.
Are they related to the bigotted antiProtty’s?
Thanks...we hope to get down there, later this year, or early next year....at that time, the hubby and I will buy our burial plots as well....as I said the cemetery is small, and altho the popuation in this area, Elk, California, still has a rather small and scattered out population, the number of available gravesites, is dwindling at a rather fast pace, and then it will be filled up...so we have to get our places reserved...
I noticed a bunch of verses from the Apoplectic Books.
Oh wheee.
That has to be equal at some level to mixing a bunch of platitudinous make believe proverbs up in a white hanky and scattering them on the lawn. Thost that land face up go one one book and those that land face down go in another.
We could call it what . . . the Fantasized Middle Books for former RC’s?
I noticed a bunch of verses from the Apoplectic Books.
Oh wheee.
That has to be equal at some level to mixing a bunch of platitudinous make believe proverbs up in a white hanky and scattering them on the lawn. Thost that land face up go one one book and those that land face down go in another.
We could call it what . . . the Fantasized Middle Books for former RC’s?
No government based . . .
Oh, right . . . not ased on the Roman political clique’s power-mongering committee’s Johnny-come-lately presumptions and biases about what would suit their political governmental ends, coffers and CONTROL FREQUE schemes best—several hundred years after the fact.
THAT government based.
Yeah, avoiding that clique’s fantasies and legends and trumped up interpretations of even the weather would be wise.
You wrote:
“Sure! What a coincidence.”
No, not a coincidence. History. Spain was invaded and occupied by Muslims, not Protestants. Spain had a long history of producing saints who wanted to convert Muslims. Germany, England and Switzerland seemed a long way from Spain when there were Muslims STILL in Spain and still attacking Christians in Jerusalem 400 years AFTER the first crusade. Jesuits in Europe only began to consider the Protestants an issue as they became one.
Even you posted: “As the object of the society was the propagation and strengthening of the Catholic faith everywhere,...”
Yep. In time, everywhere, but not when they were founded and that’s what you asked about.
“They became the main instruments of the Counter-Reformation ;”
Counter-reformation began several years AFTER THE FOUNDING OF THE JESUITS.
Again, it is a known fact that Ignatius Loyola - at the time of the foundation of the order - believed they would die as martyrs on missions to Muslims.
I don’t understand that NT reference.
LOL.
I don’t understand that NT reference.
OOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHH
I GET IT . . .
III Petronski 6:99
LOL.
You wrote:
“The gaps would only matter if the previous pope had to pick the new one and that doesn’t happen.”
Right. Then someone could claim that the succession was broken because a previous pope died before picking a successor. That isn’t an issue for Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Christians however, because that was never a dogmatic necessity for succession.
ROTFLOL! A new tactic by which to attack the truth — “time-travel!”
= = = =
Soooo . . .
—A rubber dictionary
—A rubber history
—A rubber ‘Bible’
—A rubber logic book
—A rubber math book
and now
—A rubber . . . uhhhhh “H.G.Wells”???”
I would hesitate to say TEC followed a straight path into chaos. There was a Calvinist/high Church divide and the deist wing was in there pitching too. But it was unbridled "broad church liberalism that brought them to the point where a prominent rector could say that the Creed was a pretty piece of archaic ecclesiastical poetry.
I really think the rot took hold at Lambeth in 1930 when the CofE and the Anglican Communion went for Artificial Birth Control. In 46 years their ordaining women. And I just read the Paul Moore (Bp of NY in 1972) had a homosexual lover most of his married life. he was strongly in favor of the ordination of women and ordained a practicing lesbian.
What a sorry mess!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.